People not realising (or not caring enough about) the irony that more than 80% of open source projects are hosted in a platform which is a) not open source and b) owned by M$ has always been a mistery to me.

You mean like git?

b) is a recent(*) change. GitHub was independent when it became big

a) GitHub was never open-source, but by combing git and great UI/UX, it was a good choice.

Git is open-source and the distributed nature of git reduces the vendor-lock-in. You need to understand where we came from (svn or git to some ssh server). Coming from self-hosted git, embracing github did not take away your power over your own source code; you still had a copy of all branches on multiple machines. The world is different now, where github has become a single-point of failure.

(*) Update: Okay, maybe 2018 was not recently, but my point stands. GitHub existed long before the Microsoft purchase.

A forge like Codeberg is great for collaboration, but if you mean private as in just-for-yourself, pushing to a bare repo on just about anything will get it done. No need for a software forge. If you already sync files somehow, like some dropbox equivelant, put bare repos on there and push/pull from there. That said, forgejo is very easy to self-host and the identical UI to Codeberg.

Doesn't Codeberg have private repos? I could've sworn I've created one.

If you need private repositories for commercial projects (e.g. because you represent a company or are a developer that needs a space to host private freelance projects for your clients), we would highly recommend that you take a look at Forgejo. Forgejo is the Git hosting software that Codeberg runs. It is free software and relatively easy to self-host. Codeberg does not offer private hosting services.

Frequently Asked Questions | Codeberg Documentation

(docs.codeberg.org)

As someone who moved out of there before they got taken over by MS: Told you so. I mean it's been gradual but constant enshittification since then.

BTW, is it just me or is the "at" in the headline wrong?

Even sadder: people who don't know that git is not the same as github.

more than 80% of open source projects

Really? I know that many OS projects are developed elsewhere and only mirrored on github. Even the Linux kernel. But maybe github's "coproduction" isn't read only.

If you don't mind using a platform funded by crypto

I don't do any development, but my stepkid is starting to get into it, so I set up a forgejo container on my server. I had zero issues setting it up and now I'm planning on using it for my own purposes.

There's plenty alternatives.

• Sourcehut sr.ht (possibly other instances)
• Various gitlab instances, e.g. framagit.org
• not to mention git's own web ui which runs under so many domains; some of them might even be open to signups.

What's "crypto"?

And did you mean "funded by" or "founded on"?

It does: https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/first-repository/ (visibility option)

Thanks for this! I’ll check it out.

I meant exactly what i said.

"Funded by cryptography" doesn't make sense

"Funded by crypto(currency)" does make sense

Check out their FAQ section about funding. It used to be a lot more front and center but now they are understandably trying to distance the crypto(currency) from it.

Hot damn is my self-hosted Forgejo hot right now.

Self hosting for your own needs is great but you won't get the "drive by" contributions you get from shared platforms. On GitHub, Gitlab, and Codeberg, if I even see as little as a typo in the readme file, I open a pull request. I will not sign up on a hundred different git hosters for stuff like that.

So what you're saying is that we need federated git.

Huh. Gitlab just said it's too hard with their cut staffing numbers and they're not doing federation.

git is already decentralized, and federation of the forge features of Forgejo is being worked on.